Well, for the second straight day, SM got awesome access to the convention. As a proud honorary Alaskan delegate, I had the privilege of standing on the podium with the other swing states and seeing the candidates up close. And I’ll have Abhi know that there are South Asians everywhere – even in Alaska! I discovered that this means that one could barely hear anyone speak due to the commotion occurring all around them (in this instance, making it quite like the ‘blogger lounge’), but hey, it was the podium of the DNC, so even all this commotion was quite exciting. Andrea Mitchell, Max Baucus, and even one impressive young South Asian (see Tumblr soon) were seen in action. To be honest, I can’t tell you much about the keynote, seeing as the whole crowd was buzzing in anticipation of the main act…
On the anniversary of women receiving to vote, Hillary’s speech was framed as both a celebration of her historic candidacy as well as a call for party unity. It certainly achieved the goal of celebrating the candidacy, as Hillary urged the crowd to celebrate their achievements, and used that as a standpoint to urge unity, describing how John McCain’s policies would be the direct opposite of all that she has fought for in her life. Whether she made an effective case for Obama can only be truly be gauged by Hillary supporters – all I know is that her lead to her most memorable line, describing all the parallels between Bush and McCain before commenting that “It makes sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities, because these days they’re awfully hard to tell apart,” was quite cutting and powerful.
Her candidacy and discussion about it raises some interesting questions in the South Asian community. In some aspects, we could say our community is ahead of the curve, as female leaders have already been elected in many of our countries of origin. On the other hand, there sometimes (though not often) exists a chauvinist attitude in South Asian communities that can result in great tragedy. Where do you feel South Asian American communities are when it comes to womens’ rights? Are we already very progressive, or do we have a ways to go? Do political successes or failures have a correlation to the daily rights of women in community, family, and society in South Asian communities? These are the questions that are (or should be) discussed these days in general when reflecting on the Clinton campaign, and are interesting and constructive to look at in the context of our community.
The problem though is that almost all of these have come to power through familial bonds with powerful, charismatic male figures. Indira, Sirimavo, Chandrika, Benazir… you name it.
It is still progress of a kind, but it is unclear what to make of it.
And I am guessing Manju will promptly chime in with the example of Hillary.. because clearly she was a goonghi gudiya who had no individual achievements.
1 · the doctor said
hey, i’m a well known feminist here. always credited hillary for her work during the clinton admin.
2 · Manju said
oh (just to annoy you) i belived juanita broderick. but i also believed anita hill if it make you feel better.
interesting berkeley study on women’s status vis a vis their involvement in politics.
seems like the effect is in the other direction: on an individual basis, it is women who have the ability to have a role outside the home who participate in politics.
there is another study i think either by esther duflo at mit that shows that provides evidence that exposure to women leaders reduces prejudice.
some other papers by duflo on this stuff. of course, this might tie in less to a system like the us where the executive and the legislature can be controlled by different parties.
also, a good “>good related paper by duflo on intra-household spending power and allocation consequences.
sorry for the scattered comment but it’s time i got to bed…
3 · Manju said
no manju, you amuse me.
Thank you so much for raising these points. This is SUCH an important issue that gets sidelined most of the time in discussions of South Asian politics / society. I think the situation in India and Pakistan (and I would guess, though not as with as much confidence, in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal) are abysmal, from routine domestic violence, rape, murder, harrassment, the use of women’s rights as a political football (see, for example, Muslim Women’s maintenance rights and the debate between modernist/Muslim/Hindu patriarchies over who gets to determine them in the context of “Uniform Civil Code) and their bodies (through rape) as symbols of various communities in communal conflict have all added up to…well..what can you say? In the diaspora, I think the social structures people bring with them (and ideally reinterpret but not always in helpful ways) can cause different but traumatic results there as well – as evidenced by the need for DV organizations catering to South Asians in virtually every major American city.
You might take a look at these posts over at PTR (1,2,3), 4. An excerpt from #4:
And I think the stats here are actually painting a rosier picture than exists, if that’s possible.
1 · the doctor said
The problem though is that almost all of these have come to power through familial bonds with powerful, charismatic male figures. Indira, Sirimavo, Chandrika, Benazir… you name it.
Definitely, I agreee with the good doctor. Some of the women mentioned drew their power from male legacies and propagated the existing social order in order to remain in power. I suppose if one bases their opinion of whether South Asian countries are “ahead of the curve” on the mere election of a woman, then, sure, why not?
Still, I think doing so places one in the category of Westerners who have historically boiled down their opinions of “Eastern” events into pat little statements as opposed to evaluating the nuances of each culture and what the events mean in the overall cultural context.
As a Pakistani-American, I think Benazir’s relationship with Mr. 10% clearly illustrates how much of a stride she was NOT for women’s rights in Pakistan. She couldn’t check the oppressive and corrupt patriarchy in her own home…much less help out Pakistani women.
Oh, and here’s an article that reflects an inherent bias towards exactly how I feel.
“But despite the relative abundance of female leaders in South Asia, many women in the region suffer from profound inequalities in access to education and health care, women’s advocates say. “
An article from the Washington Post analyzes this exact issue.
I believe that unforunately, problems such as domestic abuse and gender inequality continue to exist not only in our communities back in South Asia, but in the South Asian communities here in the states as well, both amongst the immigrant and second generation population.
But you have to ask the question, why? Why is it that those who have lived in educated and highly liberal surroundings still look at domestic abuse in a narrow focus? And why do incidents of abuse continue to occur even among second generation south asians?
Here is another article/blog post that outlines the same issues: http://www.outagainstabuse.com
I don’t feel – I think.
Yes.
Yes.
No.
M. Nam
In my experience, Indian women inhabit a very strange world indeed. Life for my generation of women (urban professionals) has changed beyond measure; yet being a woman in India still means accustoming oneself to frequest and often minor violations of one’s rights and sense of dignity. In many ways, daily life for women in India is a ceaseless crusade to stay safe, to be respected, and to safeguard the few rights that women have gradually come to possess. There are several things that a woman in urban India may not do for herself — trying buying an apartment or a plot of land for instance, or even buying a car, for that matter. These are mundane, everyday transactions for most men, but can become enormously daunting for the best educated and sharpest of women. Let not even begin to discuss the conditioning in passivity and docility that most women receive in India from a very young age. Frequently, parents who expect and equip their daughters to have high-paid professionals careers are the very people who will also instruct their daughters in the self-effacing servility that is expected of a good daughter-in-law. A good daughter-in-law is the impossibly passive martyr who suffers unflinchingly, every violation of her rights and sense of self, at least that is what Bollywood wanted us to believe, until recently. Anyone remember Pati Parmeshwar or Sahib Biwi Aur Ghulam? Its hard to think of an existance that is more constricting, more socially controlled than that led by a lower middle-class/middle class Indian woman in a traditional family. Tradition, custom and family honour dictate her every action, and dominate her very thought.
Of course most Indian women accept their lot with quiet resignation and despair, and most would not even be able to visualise a sense of self for themselves that is independent of the roles of wife, daughter-in-law and mother…so I guess we’re not likely to witness a feminist revolution here sometime soon!
You need to meet Parag Mehta or Gautam Raghavan of the DNC. These guys are totally going to be stars of the South Asian democratic political scene!
There are several things that a woman in urban India may not do for herself — trying buying an apartment or a plot of land for instance, or even buying a car, for that matter. These are mundane, everyday transactions for most men, but can become enormously daunting for the best educated and sharpest of women.
Bollocks. If a woman has the cash or the papers to get approved for a loan, the stress is very nearly the same as for a man. Especially in urban India. Rural India may be different.
Yeah we met up with Gautam yesterday.
10 · MoorNam said
moornam, your comments get funnier by the day.